An amusing comment from one who is obviously blind to his own grammar shortfalls.

Don't worry about the comments Westbound, us mere mortals are quiet happy to read your post as is.

I think noisy happy is better than quiet happy. :p ;)

Grounding is serious business, but I wouldn't say VARA is a strength at the moment. Front of house is somewhat okay - back of house in the AMO/CAMO still has rumours of concern - not sure on the severity though. Might be just the original concerns are taking longer to rectify and are still swirling as gossip.

I reckon VARA, and for that matter Tiger's future will depend on who gets the remaining share of VA?

Until that happens, I don't think we'll see much more development!

500's are all Brisbane. Next two 600's are for Canberra. No new routes in he near future not untill after July.

How did you come up with that Krusty?

Mel-Lst and Mel-Mql have been planned for some time....

I dunno' SHVC?

Maybe something to do with the current bottom line?

Maybe something to do with initially it's all go, go, go, then everything comes to a complete stop! Hell, even the livery change on the remainder of the domestic fleet came to an abrupt end!

Think about it. How much will the expansion of VARA from the current 14 airframes to the advertised 35 cost? And I'm not just talking aeroplanes.

How much to expand TT OZ from the current 11 airframes to the planned 30? Again, I'm not just talking aeroplanes.

The $300 mil from the latest sell-off barely scratched the surface!

I've read the annual report. VA and it's entities need an enormous amount of capital to complete the advertised expansion. I'm simply posing the question...

Where will the money come from?

Yes Melbourne and Launseston have been planned for a while but have been put on hold untill after June-July at least. Softening market in QLD the plan is to expand in NSW.

The bigger problem when expansion does proceed is simulator time, rumor has it that guys will begin to expire this year because of this.

Are there plans to put an ATR sim in Australia? Surely its getting to the point where the amount of airframes in country justifies it. Sending guys to Auckland and Singapore every 3 months (??) for their sims can't be sustainable.

Yep, can of worms mate.

Time is what is needed. That and a stack of cash. Hopefully it all pans out!

Im sure that is the plan, but ATR won't come to the party anytime soon I think.

Unlikely. Even without the delayed expansion of the ATR fleet, that flying is better done ex CBR base with overnights at out ports.

They do 3 month sims? Really?

Cost of a flight to Auckland or even Singapore is how much more than say Mel? Peanuts in the scheme of things.

4-6 months sims and yes very expensive sending guys to Auckland and Singapore when they have to go Buissness class.

Wouldn't of thought they would be paying full fare considering Singapore and AirNZ have stakes in mainline..........

More reason to keep it in the EBA if there's no sims likely in Australia for a while ;p

V's 1st Hull Loss ???
 

Why is it that the grounded VARA ATR 72 in Albury hasn't been repaired as yet ?

Why is it that CASA doesn't provide a P.U.S to allow it to fly to a place so it can be repaired ???

Why is it that the manufacturer hasn't come to aid ( of 1 very good customer ) with a viable fix to free this machine to operate again ?

Why won't CASA allow 1 extra - free spare unit - to join the fleet to replace that which is still sitting in Albury ???

Hmmm, all very quite out there concerning this very troubled unit !!!

I'll bite
 

Obviously I missed something:

What happened - heavy landing?

Confused
 

So DutyofCare says: "V's 1st Hull Loss ???"

While I don't know what happened to the aircraft, the title suggests major damage. I presume that DutyofCare is being rhetorical with his questions to point out some issue with CASA Airworthiness and the controlling office. :hmm:

Presumably the damage is outside normal AMM processes and limits. It would also appear that the manufacturer has not devised a repair scheme and, understandably, no CAR 37 (or whatever it is now) delegate will take on the liability in the absence of OEM support. :oh:

The clear implication is that the structural damage is so severe that only an on-site remanufacturing option (such as the B717 and the A380 repairs) is viable. If that is the case, then any reference to a CASA PUS is both nugatory and gratuitous. If it is not the case, then the implied scenario is mischievous or worse. := :sad: :bored:

Does anybody have any clarifying information?

As for the last question, that has me intrigued:

Is CASA really preventing such a course of action?

If so, on what basis?

Are there issues with registration, airworthiness control, RPT compliance, leasing arrangements, etc of the spare aircraft?

If the aircraft meets all the requirements to be added to the AOC or substituted in on a temporary basis, what operational requirements could possibly become a roadblock to what seems to be a normal commercial arrangement?

I hate being confused, so can someone shed some light on this, please? :confused:

Nothing will be done to the Aircraft in question whilst the ATSB has it impounded. This is still the case.


The manufacturer (ATR) has been on site I believe and assume they will give their feedback once aircraft is released from the ATSB.


From what I have heard and photos I've seen this will definitely be an ATR AOG crew recovery.

When did this alleged incident occur?? Nothing noted regarding an active investigation on the atsb website.